What translation should I read, friends?

What translation should I read, friends?

Attached: 9780857830159.jpg (1000x1557, 141K)

Other urls found in this thread:

terebess.hu/english/tao/gia.html
beatrice.com/TAO.txt
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Hall & Ames is my favorite. Ursula K. Leguin's translation is also very good (more poetic than H&A, if that's your thing)

All of them

None of them, read Sun Tzu instead.

Many thanks.

Red Pine.

>attack when the enemy is weak
wow Sun Tzu

>high ground advantage niggga
bravo

>Lao Tzu never existed
>the book itself is just a composite of other texts arbitrarily put together by random chinamen 2000+ years ago
>classical chinese translates extremely poorly to modern english anyway
Don't bother, you'll be reading something that has almost no basis in reality.

don't listen to this guy. Ursala's paticularly, is very poor.

terebess.hu/english/tao/gia.html

this is the best one. feng + english

There's one online, Victor H. Mair I believe. It's organized a bit differently online than in book form but it's still a good read.

So... I read this and... is Tao Logos?

High quality bait! You don't normally see such a thing here...

You should probably be on the lookout for a remedy for the spineless: a new book with something very old to say.

Attached: CKIJKSOUsAAF0sc.jpg (600x337, 28K)

>classical chinese translates extremely poorly to modern english anyway
This.
The distance between 2000 year old hyroglyphis and modern European language is immense.
At least some knowledge in Mandarin and some commentary is needed.

Translate it yourself from the Mawangdui Silk. That’s what I did.

beatrice.com/TAO.txt

If you can talk about it,
it ain't Tao.
If it has a name,
it's just another thing.

Tao doesn't have a name.
Names are for ordinary things.

Stop wanting stuff;
it keeps you from seeing what's real.
When you want stuff,
all you see are things.

Those two sentences
mean the same thing.
Figure them out,
and you've got it made.

Is Cleary a good translation?

>If you can talk about it,
>it ain't Tao.
>If it has a name,
>it's just another thing.

A very common and horrible misconception.

“The way that can be spoken of is not the constant way…” (I,1)

...is the line, and what it says has to do with the difference between a snapshot and a film.

The first step, when you don't what what the fuck you are talking about, is to shut up and listen.

Whatever you do don’t buy the Mitchell new age translation

ah yes, the obvious
>China is economically superior to the US but militarily much weaker
>let's start a trade war with them!
lamo

Attached: united.jpg (960x591, 77K)

NOT Stephen Mitchell.

Both lines have essentially the same meaning, anyway: if it can be isolated for projection, it's not the way.

merton's translated selections

At the very least Feng and English is a lesson in how to make a perfect coffee table book.

>economicaly superior
They're litteraly riding a wave of american money. It's draining up.
On their own They're only capable of intellectual pretension. They go "wow our 3000 years of culture How can the West even compete!" While for 2900 of these years they did nothing but murder riotous paesants write cringeworthy poetry and copy themselves and eachother ab nauseam.
Their """civilization""" didn't even have an equivalent to Euclid when Jesuit monks came and thaught them actual civilization.

The path that is cleared isn't the same as the thing that cleared the path. Yet both are related.

I know all this sounds odd, but you will be better off the less you bring to this concept. Words weren't added for effect or reinforcement, they were added to supply additional information.

Attached: 986D636C-BA05-4FD8-817E-F717E7E3E7DD.jpg (804x1255, 322K)